Response to Final Decision in Coppedge v. JPL

Response to Final Decision in Coppedge v. JPL

LOS ANGELES - William J. Becker, Jr. of Freedom X issued the following statement in response to the judgment issued today in David Coppedge vs. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Los Angeles Case No. BC 435600 (document links appear after text):

David and I are naturally disappointed in the court's decision, the unnecessary lengthy delay in reaching it and, after such a lengthy time, the judge's inability to write the decision himself, or at least explain the contradictions in the evidence.

By failing to address the evidence personally, thoughtfully and carefully, the judge in this case left the door wide open to have the judgment overturned on appeal.

David was the victim of religious discrimination because a handful of malicious co-workers hated his Christian views, as well as his interest in intelligent design, which they ignorantly perceived to be a religious concept. He was demoted and fired for simply being a Christian and someone who believes that nature can be scientifically explained by reference to designs found within it.

This case took more than three years to litigate. Judge Ernest Hiroshige sat through five weeks of trial last March and April, observed dozens of witnesses, admitted a mountain of evidence, listened to closing arguments, required voluminous post-trial briefing that delayed a ruling by nine months, and never once accepted the responsibility of expressing his view of the evidence. Instead, he farmed the task out to JPL.

By rubber-stamping JPL's ghost-written decision, Judge Hiroshige demonstrated how easy it is to collect a paycheck from the taxpayers without actually having to do the work of a judge. At the end of the day, we still have no clue how the judge really felt about the evidence.

It is really remarkable that the judge could sit there for five weeks and still not have the fortitude to tell us what he thinks. This was anything but a bold act, but we will leave it for others to describe it for what it appears to be.

Under state law, we filed specific objections to JPL's statement of decision, which required the judge to reconcile JPL's evidence with our evidence contradicting it. By overruling our objections without giving a reason, the judge has all but handed us a victory on appeal.

As for the community of rabid anti-intelligent design forces that snicker and snark at the concept and ignorantly confuse and conflate it with Creationism, to paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of the demise of this case would be greatly exaggerated.

For the truth about intelligent design, please visit the Discovery Institute's website here.

For background on the Coppedge case, please visit this site.



No Comments Posted